This happened in year 2007 feb ----
INVESTMENT PROPOSAL -I
PLOTS -BLOCKS OF 1000SQ.YDS EACH.
Purchase of developed plotted area -1000 sq.yds.
Price per square yard - Rs 600 per sq.yd
Registration charges - Extra .
Total Purchase price -RS 6 LAKHS FOR 1000 SQ.YDS + REG CHARGES.
E xpected sale price per sq.yd - Rs 2000 sq.yd.
Total sale value: Rs20 lakhs
sale expenses (approx)--- Rs 2 lakhs .
Effective sale proceeds - Rs 18 lakhs.
Net profit ---------------------------RS 12LAKHS FOR 1000 SQ.YDS.
MODE OF OPERATION --------1000 SQ.YDS DEVELOPPED PLOTTED AREA WILL BE REGISTERED TO THE BUYER UPON RECEIPT OF LAYOUT APPROVAL
This was given by a real estate developer when project was about to start just a xerox of above item.
Later the agreement of sale was made for just Rs4,25,000 cost of plot and cost of development with all amenites promised in agrement of sale ,
1.project elevation/arch. 2.plot layout. 3.black top roads. 4.water lines. 5.sewer lines. 6.street lighting. 7.electical lines. 8.overhead tank. 9.plantation in each plot. 10.Avenue plantation. 11.Parks. 12.resorts. 13.bared wire fencibng to the project site. The above specification were promised by them in agrement of sale.
The developer failed to keep his promise no development nothing its like a jungle even after 6 years i payed total consideration of 4,25,000 rupees i have receipt too.
Now i can go to consumer court to fight the case as they did not provide basic amenities like road water etc as promised .
Does this case come under consumer court , the developer says its a commercial transaction as profit is show i am confused can any one help me can i fight in consumer court this case ,
But the sale consideration was not made as 6 lakhs as in xerox paper it was made for just 4,25,000 lakhs.
the layout has no permission , but anyone can clear reg this issue is this a commercial transaction as developer is saying help me please.
Does word Investment proposal according to law is commercial , not a consumer , confused with all thes technical words can i fight r not in consumer courts.